Decoration Day

On this Decoration Day in 2015, I ask myself what I can do to honor the many who died in defense of this country, the United States of America, and its ideals.

Beyond a moment of brief reflection, what act can I convey that will have lasting impact?

The answer to that question must not come from a ritual or habit imposed from without but from within my soul as an individual for the sacrifice that was made by those brave soldiers was an individual sacrifice.

What these soldiers died for were my rights as an individual American which are nobly embodied in our Bill of Rights.

Of all the documents and words that governments have engendered over the millennia, none have attained the pinnacle, the standard as the the American Bill of Rights.

This small piece of paper, added after the fact, yet not diminished by so doing, is the basis of our remarkable republic.

This American Bill of Rights is the soul of our nation and represents the best in us.

This is what these brave soldiers died for.

As such, it remains to me to ask what individual sacrifice I can make today to honor the preservation of this document for which these men and women gave their lives.

When will I stand up?

What am I prepared to sacrifice?

Honor by Association

Suppose that a man killed another man at your local grocery store while you were shopping there.  Should you be branded an accomplice?

Okay, let’s ask another question.

Suppose that you attended the same school that Adolf Hitler attended as a youth.  Should you be branded as a mass murderer?

Okay, maybe that isn’t close enough to home.

Suppose you attended the same school as Jeffrey Skilling, the former CEO of Enron.  Should you be branded a crook?

Of course not; that would be unfair.

We call this guilt by association.

Okay, suppose that you attended the same school that Meryl Streep attended?  Should you be branded a great actor?

Okay, suppose that you attended a school that has pumped out three great scientists?  Should we brand you as a great scientist?

Are you with me?

Suppose that you attended Reed College?  Should we brand you as a great inventor and marketing whiz?

Now, if you say, yes, this discussion is over and I grant you leave to go mow the yard or fix a batch of cookies.

What I have just described is honor by association, and it has been just as damaging to this nation as guilt by association.

Many of you who have been reading my columns may have wondered why I am so tough on the Ivy League

Indeed, I have one friend who has openly ridiculed and dismissed me by stating, “Archer thinks that every graduate from the Ivy League is stupid.”

No, I think most of them are stupid.

The smart ones were smart enough to effectively renounce their school.  They were too embarrassed at what they saw there and what their school had become.

I don’t know abut you, but if someone celebrated me because I had attended a school without having accomplished a damn thing – I would be EMBARRASSED.

You see, things didn’t used to be this way.

In an earlier time, our major institutions had a broader representation of graduates from other schools.

This occurred because the values of the country were different.

Our ancestors lived in a country where who you were as a person and what you did as an individual counted most.

Now, of course, we have always have elitist jackasses, the kind of people who crave to attend Bolloxford, Hartard and Eli Bandit University.

Still, the predominant tone in that era was to look at people as individuals.

But then along came the media, always the media, to begin their parade of lies, to begin programming people that graduates from certain schools were of a better breed.

Never mind that the owners of the media were also graduates from these schools.

No self-promotion there.

Keep moving along.

Okay, big deal.  Who gives a shit, Archer?  Does it really matter?

Why, yes, yes, I think it does.

It matters because when people at top levels of our government come from one or two institutions, inbreeding of thought occurs.

In other words, people reenforce a limited view of the world.

Tunnel vision ensues.

I did not understand this as a young man.

On the medical ward one day, I asked my professor why so many of the professors came from different parts of the country.

“I don’t get it.  Why doesn’t the school just hire guys who graduated from here?”

He told me what I am telling you now that when you hire from within, you get intellectual inbreeding.  You don’t get people with different ideas.

You stagnate.

This is the problem with our government today.

There are simply too many people from just a few schools.

Now, you may argue that Hartard and Eli Bandit are diverse schools who recruit from all over the United States and the world.

You pound your fist and defend the schools that oppress you by stating emphatically that Hartard and Eli Bandit have farm girls, Eskimos, southern hicks and so forth at their schools.

Yes, this is true.  Hartard and Eli Bandit went into every community they could find to select the one crafty, glib trickster out of that group malleable enough to whom they could sell their bullshit.

This was their first day at Hartard.

President Immoral stood before them and stated the following:  “Youuuu … are the elites.  Youuuu … are the creme de la creme.  Youuuu … will lead America.  Youuuu … will lead the world.”

And with their mouths agape,  they bought it.

They bought the bullshit, and they’ve been buying it ever since.

Yep, they drank the Kool-Aid.

And so, when they got out into the real world, they only listened to people who graduated from Hartard and Eli Bandit.

They only hired graduates from Hartard and Eli Bandit.

Everyone else was clearly a dumb-ass.

Now, of course, they couldn’t say this, but they believed it nonetheless.

They really did, and they showed it every day by their discrimination against you.

Isn’t this obvious?

And so here we are, you and I, living through an insufferable recession which is coming up on a decade-old.

Why can’t our leaders fix it if they are so smart?

These people, our leaders who come from Hartard and Eli Bandit, these unmitigated geniuses – why can’t they fix things?

A rhetorical question.

They can’t fix it because they don’t know how.

But you do, and you have been telling them what to do for the past eight years.

But you see, they can’t listen to you.

You are not noble, and if you the unwashed offer the solution, why then, they, gasp, are not noble.

The reality is this:  These people who are in charge, these graduates from Hartard and Eli Bandit are victims of a cruel hoax foisted upon them by themselves.

What is this hoax?

The lie that someone can be great simply by standing next to another person whether in person for by proxy through an institution.

It’s called honor by association.

Inflation and People

Since 2008 and before the United States has “printed” trillions of dollars whether it be for fighting wars abroad or for investing in stuff here.

For a while now, economists and other people of note have been expecting inflation.

Yet we have not seen it.

Why?  Where did all the money go?

Well, we can’t always predict when things will happen, but we’d feel better if we could at least hit the broad side of the barn.

Again, where did all the money go?

Let’s look at inflation and what it is.  Let’s define the inflation index as the amount of available money divided by the number of eco-available people.  As we increase the available money supply, inflation should go up.  But that assumes that banks are loaning money and that money isn’t being sequestered or used in some other country via hoarding or desire (maybe their own economy stinks).

Or maybe the US through force is requiring other countries to purchase oil around the world in US dollars, which it does.

Let’s looks at the other side of the ratio in the inflation index – the eco-available people.  As we weaken citizens economically via misspending, as we throw more people out of work via merging of corporate behemoths, inflation should go up.  But that assumes that people aren’t being born, that immigration is non-existent, and that people aren’t being brought into the US economy economically, if not politically.

In fact, all these events are happening, which is why we aren’t seeing inflation.

Our powers-that-be are, and have been, transforming the US economy into the world’s economy.

The problem with this idea, approach, goal is that the economy isn’t our economy anymore.

Gradually, the US citizen and his or her economic status is being sucked downward.

In other words, the standard of living in the third world isn’t rising on its own.  We are moving downward to its standard.

This is the great idea our leaders have.

Why this should be their plan, I do not know.  Perhaps to prevent war, perhaps for good-old fashioned greed.

Who cares?

Let’s leave aside the unworkability of our leaders’ plan.  I have already spoken about that in prior discussions.

What are we going to do when the shit hits the fan as it will?

Well, let’s return to our inflation index as I have explained it earlier.

In time, other countries will no longer need to hold US dollars.  In time, US dollars will not command the respect they do now.

As economies around the world dump the US dollar, we are going to be stuck with a shitload of dollars, which will represent a tremendous inflationary force for those of still living in the United States.  I will assume you can not jet to your second home in Costa Rica, or maybe your third home in Tuscany, down the street from George Clooney.

Oh, but he had that street blocked off to the rabble who were staring at his wife. Sorry, I forgot.

Anyway, what will we do with such massive inflation?

Well, we can always screw like the Dickens to increase the population but that will take at least nine months.

In the meantime, there a few sensible things that can be done.

One, we can begin to increase the eco-availability of the people by de-merging our corporate behemoths.  We can place sensible controls on how large these corporations can become.  We can mandate that any one company in a mature industry not possess more than a certain percentage of the market share.  As companies become smaller, as competition grows, employment rises – just as employment conversely decreases when companies merge – and our quality of life rises as better products result.

Two, assuming that we do not desire a loaf of bread to cost a thousand dollars, we can ask our government to decrease the money supply by confiscating money, stock and assets from the wealthy losers and do-nothings who were the recipients of this extraordinary federal largesse in the past ten years.  I’m talking about the insider thieves here.

What we are really asking these wealthy crooks to do is pay their fair share for fucking up the economy in the first place.  Essentially, the government is taking their assets back in order to pay off debt.  Consider it a reversing of the engine that created their ill-gotten gain in the first place. There is probably a trillion dollars or more in idle wealth just sitting around doing nothing.

This, the decreasing of money supply, will be an important measure in order to keep interest rates low so as to not tank the economy completely.  Any increase in interest rates will decrease the eco-availability of the people and thus be counterproductive.  Plus, by nullifying the eco-rapists’ assets, especially stocks, we increase the wealth of hard-working Americans who got fucked by these people in the first place.

Three, we can relax the banking laws that are making it difficult for Americans to get home loans.  Property ownership in the form of a home is crucial to not only the economy but to law and order as well.  If Americans do not have a stake in the game, crime and social disorder arise.  As crime rises, the eco-availability of the people decreases – and with it inflation rises.

Four, we will have to place some rational control on our borders in order to prevent an influx of poor people who by their presence will decrease the eco-availability of the population.

Now, I state these measures not only to outline a rational plan, but to illustrate how the powers-that-be will attempt to do the exact opposite.

The powers-that-be will attempt to do the following to control inflation: They will continue to permit mergers under the flawed theory of economies of scale that states that bigger companies can provide cheaper goods more affordable to the masses – you.  Along those lines, they will continue to create federal boondoggles, including useless wars, backed up by little science but much money, that enrich their buddies.  This will, of course, necessitate the raising of interest rates to prevent inflation.  Never mind, that such increase in interest rates will crater the economy, for you see, our leaders  believe that if the economy heats up, through home building, this very act could further inflation.

Yes, to our leaders, an increase in wealth is a dangerous thing.

And while it is true that an increase in wealth increases the amount of available money through circulation, an inflationary force, inflation does not occur because the increase in available money is offset by the increase in eco-available people.

In spite of this our leaders will raise interest rates.

Now, none of this will work, you know that, and so to avoid looking like complete fools, which they are, our leaders will allow unbridled immigration into the United States so as to dilute inflation.

Yes, inflation can be controlled by bringing Mexico into the United States, by creating a common market with an Amero, which is their true goal –  but at what cost?

Big deal, we don’t have inflation.  We’ve got poverty instead.

You see, my friend, inflation is a symptom not a disease.  Poverty is a disease, not a symptom.

Of course, we’re talking to Warthog School graduates here, somebodies, Dynamite Prize winners, people who have attended the London School of Simpletons.

The Limits to Precision

There is a reasonable limit to precision.

Why should this be so?

It is so because of the three-dimensional nature of precision.

As it is depicted now on a two-dimensional plane of paper, precision, discrimination to a finer detail, is depicted on the same plane.

Yet, higher levels of detail rest on a physically deeper plane.

So if we spread the numbers, 1 through 10, on a sheet of paper, they reside on the surface.  The numbers that rest between, 1.1 and so forth, rest at a deeper level.

Now, there are no set levels, and we can construct as many as we want; and we can define what sits at what level – that is not the point.

The point, or at least one of the points, is that as we move to deeper levels, the clarity of the world we live in, on the surface, declines.

Secondly, and equally important, events and consequent interpretations of those events, that occur at deeper levels, can not be brought upward to the surface to interact with events and consequent interpretations that occur at the surface.

In other words, events that occur at deeper levels rest within the context of what is going on at the surface.

So, accepting this paradigm, we more clearly see how people can get so close to the trees that they miss the forest.

Accepting this paradigm, we more clearly see how people can become so smart as to be stupid.

Accepting this paradigm, we more clearly see how people can so easily put the cart before the horse and construct theories that permit the tail to wag the dog.

Accepting this paradigm, we more clearly see how lawyers get murderers off free because their Miranda rights were violated.

Accepting this paradigm, we  more clearly see how the Obama administration can feel that the answer to the violence conducted by ISIS in the Middle East can be solved with a jobs program.

The crowd who feels superior to the rest of us via their highly nuanced thinking, always a danger, is correct only within the context of a higher level in which their thinking must necessarily reside.

As we descend to a deeper level, our clarity in viewing the world at the surface diminishes.  A disconnect or discordance arises when we bring deeper levels to a surface level.

So, yes, jobs can be valuable to a society as an idle mind is the devil’s workshop, but only within the context of a sane society, not one where a non-existent society beheads children and throws gays off buildings.

Yes, the murder’s rights were violated but this does not mitigate the fact that he did it.  A deeper level of nuanced thinking cannot be brought to the surface to overrule the the defining context.  More sane thinking would be to punish the police officer for not following through with the procedure while allowing the conviction to stand.

So, the point to this discourse is that precision has its limits.  Precision, the search for it, the reliance on it, the faith in it, has reasonable limits grounded in clarity.

As we look at finer detail, the more removed we become from reality.

And as we see less of our own world, through blurry vision, by looking deeper, the more imprecise our world becomes.


Do you think our government really cares about fixing crime?

Or is it all bullshit?

Is crime too big a business for the government to get rid of?

With every mom and pop town vying to host a prison, there can be little doubt that crime pays – at least for the big corporations who make a boatload of money off crime.

Crime is big business for the the cities that host the prisons, the contractors who build the prisons, the food and clothing vendors who supply the prisons, and, of course, the cronies of the politicians who sell the city the land upon which the prisons will be built.

With all this money to be made, who would want to get rid of crime?

I’ve always said that if Jesus returned to eliminate crime, they, the powers that be, would have to kill him all over again.

Can’t you just hear them speaking?

Hey, who is this guy, Jesus?  He’s cutting into our bottom line.  Get rid of this guy.  Now!

Never stand between a merchant and his money.

Does this sound cynical?

Well, when you’ve been listening to politicians harping about and failing to fix crime for your entire lifetime, you begin to think that they are devious or dumb but not both.  You can’t be both.

You either are too stupid to fix crime, which means to minimize it, or you are smart enough to do so but choose not to.

Which is it?

Are our politicians devious or dumb?

Well, we know they are dumb, but not dumb because they are dumb but because they think we aren’t smart enough to figure them out – which we are.

It’s just that we put up with their bullshit  – which makes us dumb.

Come on now, how hard can it be to fix crime?

You decrease the factors that lead to crime and you increase the punishment for crime.

Unfortunately, money supported by stupid ideas backed up by studies get in the way.

So, what to do?

Well, the fixing of crime isn’t going to come all once, and it isn’t going to come from our leaders.

Our leaders are gone – co-opted.

Bought off.

The fixing of crime has to come from us.

To fix crime we have to make it pay less for the criminal which means we will have to change.

The easiest way is to begin to change our personal habits by refusing to purchase pirated videos, illegal drugs, stolen merchandise, sex for hire and such.

Of course, if you are a law-abiding citizen, you already do that, and so you may ask what else you can do because the poor are unlikely to do so.

Well, it turns out, there is something you can do.

First, you can get tougher on your kids and who they hang out with because recruitment into crime begins early.  Second, you can begin to walk away from television and video games and orient your kids to books instead so that your kids have an opportunity in life.  By doing so you teach them to invest their money in education rather than overpaid sports starts and celebrities.

More important than all these measures, though, is to begin to strengthen local businesses, the mom and pops who do not profit off the national agenda.

The larger food chains and vendors help decrease the labor force in America in terms of quantity and quality.  When one giant supermarket or office supply store wipes out dozens of independent vendors, it decreases overall employment.  When a chain grows bigger nationally it in turn forces a consolidation in the industries that supply its products, and it decreases American employment.

If I own Pig-Mart, a national chain, and I bully my supplier of lamps to get the price cheaper, this supplier, International Pig Lamp, lays off workers in the United States for Chinese workers.

Of course, this benefits International Pig Lamp, because its stock price rises as its bottom line is cut.

This, of course, excites the reporter-pigs on the networks who begin masturbating on camera.

And it excites the corporate leaders of International Pig Lamp because they had previously robbed shareholders of value by awarding themselves millions of stock options at a corporate board meeting run by a Board of Directors who are cronies of the corrupt CEO.  This was a trick, Joe Corruption, CEO,  had learned at the Warthog School which, by the way, sits on the edge of West Philadelphia, an area ravaged by unemployment which his corrupt school helped to ravage.

But what of the people who were laid off?  What happens to them?

You can see it for yourself in North Central and West Philadelphia.

You can see it for yourself in East St. Louis.

The people there are hurting.

When people are laid off from work, when there is no money coming in, they become wards of the state.  They lose their houses and become renters.  All sorts of social problems increase.  Domestic violence increases.  Child abuse increases.

Crime increases.

Every time we purchase at Pig-Mart, and I am one of these people, we increase crime in America.

The model is broken.

We need a new economic model.

You see, our corporate cowards of industry, dumbed down by the Ivy League business schools they attended, believe mistakenly that America will be the executives to the world and that the Chinese will be satisfied in making our plastic cups, toothbrushes and t-shirts in perpetuity.

The problem with that approach, as if it needed to be explained, well, not to you, the regular reader, only to Ivy League boobs, is that the Chinese are not going to be satisfied with making our junk forever; plus, the idea that every person can be or wants to be an executive is ludicrous.

China has just as many intelligent people as we do, and it won’t be too long before they can hold us hostage via manufacturing.

In other words, we need manufacturing jobs in this country for people who can not or do not want to be an executive.  We need to give them some means of earning a living.  If we do not, well, then burned out cities is what you get.

Does this make sense?

What happened in the US over the past seventy-five years was that manufacturing, once dispersed and owned by families as small to midsized companies, got bought out by larger concerns.  In other words, consolidation took place.  With consolidation came unions, increased labor costs plus greater distance between leaders and workers which led to what I call “entitlement syndrome.”  With that, the corporate cowards of industry shifted manufacturing out of the US.

What needs to occur is a new introduction of manufacturing back into the United States, but with a method that avoids the big unions and the scumbags from the Ivy League business schools.

In other words, we need a small business approach that takes care of its workers.

What we need is micro-facturing that can make all the stuff we need.

Now, of course, media blowhards will pooh-pooh the idea, tell us that it can not work, economies of scale, the usual bullshit from the London School of Losers, formerly known as the London School of Eco-Rapists, but in fascist circles known as the London School of Economics – always a good source for bad ideas.

But we know in our gut that it will work.

All sorts of money will be saved on shipping, advertising, money that does not need to be returned to investor pigs who do nothing.

You see, when you don’t have to return fifteen percent to an idle investor, when you don’t need to be advertising to the world, when you are just making for people locally, your overhead goes down.

The strong local guy can beat the national chain any day of the week.

And this type of micro-facturing can be done in virtually every industry.

But none of this can happen unless there is a change in the heart of Americans to look for another way out.  And as long as Americans keep throwing their money at Pig-Mart, Pig-Mart will continue to bully suppliers like International Pig Lamp to keep manufacturing in China.

Just as micro-breweries have arisen to take market share away from the likes of these international beer companies, so too can micro-shirt and micro-shoe factories take away business away from the huge corporations.

And when people are working they have less time for drugs, sex, watching worthless television shows, robbing convenience stores and accepting crumbs from the government.

Crime will decrease markedly as true employment goes up, at which point we won’t give two shits what a politician has to say.

In fact, people will start demanding that those empty prisons they used to live in be converted to industrial use.

Wouldn’t that be something?

Biker Gangs and Punishment

Since biker gangs are in the news, I thought it would be good to talk about crime and punishment.

What should we do with people who flagrantly flout the law and engage in drug dealing, prostitution, money laundering, loan sharking, gun running and such?

Can we really say that these people deserve the same breaks as people who in the heat of the moment beat their wife, steal from a convenience store, or engage in some other crime?

What is the difference between a gang that undermines society in a concerted manner and a foreign invading force?


What do we do to a foreign invading force?

We empower the military to take them down with extreme prejudice.  In other words, we kill them.

Now, of course, defenders of criminals will talk about the rights of the accused and such.  They will wax eloquent about the constitution. They will speak about the underlying causes of criminality which are of course valid.

Still, why should we not take these criminals out?

These people are not rehabilitate-able and they do not want to be rehabilitated.

They operate outside the law which is why we call them outlaws.  Indeed, they embrace this image.

They place images of death and destruction such as skulls, knives and guns on their jackets.  And they give themselves names like Bandidos, Cossacks and Hell’s Angels – names hardly connoting peace.

Since they clearly desire death, why are we holding back?

We shouldn’t.

We should take them out for the same reason we would seek to eradicate the ebola virus.

We eradicate the ebola virus because it threatens our life.

Lost in the discussion of crime and punishment is this essential question:  Why do we have to obey the law and they, the criminals, do not?

Well, that’s the point.  They do.

For many years now we have tolerated these criminals in the form of the Mafia, biker gangs and such.

We have tolerated them so long that we have come to accept their presence as normal.

It seems almost unthinkable to not have these thugs, right?

Indeed, many citizens have been ingrained to think of these organized crime gangs as janitors, societal spiders, cleaning up, eating and keeping in line the other vermin and bugs that our rotting culture offers up.

Thank god for the biker gangs, right?

Why, the societal good they do.


But what if society is not meant to function in this way?

Suppose people are meant to live a full life in peace with goodwill to all.

Only by accepting this can we begin to say no to these criminals.

By acknowledging their lack of a right to exist in a criminal state, we begin to address their crimes  forcefully.

Currently we through law enforcement put up with their nonsense.

But suppose government possessed the power to officially classify a biker gang as a concerted underminer of society and therefore an enemy of the United States of America.

Acting upon this we can then license the police to take them out on sight if they are wearing the uniform of the enemy.

This would be an important event and undertaking.

If we can force them to not wear their colors, we can do great damage to their ability to recruit.

Bikers are human beings also.  They calculate.

If we make them pay the price, they will stop.

Punishment works.

Lack of punishment gives them license.

Now, this is not to say that we should not also address underlying causes of criminality such as economic disparity, rampant pornography, child abuse and such.

In the meantime, though, let’s get tough on these little pricks, these little pricks who won’t grow up.

For crying out loud, some of these guys are 55 years old!  Are you kidding me?  You’re 55 and you’re still riding with a biker gang?

Grow the fuck up, bitch!  Get a fucking job!

Come on now, why should you or I have to cower in fear when we see these massive biker gangs move down the highway?

We shouldn’t.

Free Trade, Pacific Rim and Greece

Congress is currently debating a free-trade agreement with pacific rim countries, and as usual battle-lines are drawn – but with strange alliances.  Republican are siding with the President and Democrats are opposing him.  If this does not convince  you that none of these politicians has any cohesive philosophy underlying their outlook on the world, nothing will. But I did not want to talk about the battle except as a portal to a discussion on trade.

Here is my question:  Is it possible for a small country, say the size of Greece, about eleven million people, to be self-sufficient and prosperous?

Suppose that we placed a bubble around Greece extending twelve miles beyond its land-sea borders, thus enabling it to fish.  Is it possible for this country to be self-sufficient?

The free-traders claim that unless Greece can trade with the world, it will be poor.

Well, Greece has that power now, yet it is poor.

Of course, this poverty is attributed to the debt that it owes to the EU and the creepy German bankers – which is true.

But if free trade is such a panacea why can’t Greece pay its bills?

Well, free trade only works if you have something to trade; and if you aren’t making stuff that people want, guess what, you can’t get stuff from other countries unless you borrow money to get it. Thus the essential fallacy of free trade.

But what would happen if Greece did not need to trade?

Suppose Greece could make all the stuff it ever needed right there in Greece.

Is there a shortage of arable land?  No.  Is there a shortage of fish in the sea?  No.  Is there a shortage of mountains in which to mine ores? No. Is there a shortage of animals?  No.  Well, where else do products come from?

If it is one thing we have learned about man in the past thousands of years, it is that man can survive anywhere on the planet no matter the terrain or climate.

So what’s the problem? Why can’t Greece make its own houses, cars, food and entertainment?

What’s the fucking problem here?

The problem is that free trade isn’t really free trade at all, but free imperialism.

As long as one country can sell with blank check in one country without purchasing one damn thing in return, the seeds of poverty, dependence and war will be sown.

When one nation is on the upside of a trade imbalance a parent-child relationship is created in which the creditor nation can dictate terms to the debtor nation.  The debtor nation becomes a welfare colony dependent upon a debt that never gets repaid.

This is what goes on in Greece.

And … this is what goes on in the inner cities of America with the exception that the federal government of the United States taxes its citizens to pay the debt on an ongoing basis.

Free trade left to its own devices, uncontrolled, leads to such imbalances. Yet such imbalances are unnecessary, for there is no earthly reason why Greece, or the inner cities of America, can not make their own stuff.

The free-traders will respond by singing the song of comparative advantage written by Adam Smith two-hundred and some years ago.

Adam Smith … Adam Smith …

Free traders and the corpo-pigs believe that certain nations are better at making certain products so that presumably we should defer to having Greece make olives; Italy, pasta; China, clothes; Japan, television sets, and so forth.  Then we can barge this junk all over the world.

You get the idea.

It fits so well with their New World Order, don’t you think?  Especially since they are now in control. Why would they want competition?

So they get their puppets to sing about comparative advantage.

The fallacy in this variant of comparative advantage is that Greece isn’t comprised of one man and one woman who have cloned themselves five million times apiece. Greece and the inner cities of America are diverse with many people with many strengths.

There is no reason why Greece can not excel at many, many things. There is no reason why the inner cities of American can not excel at many, many things.

Besides how will we know unless they try. Why not let the market decide that? Why not let the people of Greece decide?  Why not let the people of inner-city America decide?

What’s holding them back?

Well, I would not be surprised if what is holding them back is regulation.

And who would sponsor such regulation?

Why, the very corporations who thrive off the welfare state itself. Why would they want competition when there is so much to be gained otherwise?

Why would a huge international corporation like Globe-Car want Greece to be making its own cars; they might not buy Globe-Cars.

Why would a huge international corporation like World-Shoe want Greece to be making its own shoes; they might not buy World-Shoes.

Do you get the flow of money here? It’s a welfare colony. The government gives money to the people who use it to buy goods from international corporations.  The international corporations in turn place the money in their banks who then loan it to the government of Greece with interest.

It’s beautiful.

Except for the people of Greece who must now be treated like a child by their strict German parents.

The same welfare colony exists in our own cities in America. It’s beautiful here too – except for the people of the inner cities who have no stake in the game.

This is why you can take a train ride into Philadelphia or any other major city and see street after street of burned out, graffiti-ridden buildings.

But it does not need to be this way.

All of this can change.

It can change because the pillars of free trade are bullshit.

Comparative advantage does not apply to nations but to people.

Free trade without something to trade is destructive.

So, is it possible for Greece to be self-sufficient? Yes.

Is it possible for the peoples of the inner cities of America to be self-sufficient? Yes.

Now, does this mean that  Greece and the inner cities of America  must be self-sufficient in totality?

No, because there are advantages to receiving new products that others have made or better products than what you are currently making.

Thus a certain amount of free trade is desirable.

But let’s not get ridiculous here.

A nation, a region, an area can NEVER allow itself to import everything, less it be raped en extremis eternally.

Every region and ever country must reserve the power on some level to tell the rest of the world to fuck off.

Okay, given that, how does this bear on the proposed trade agreement with pacific rim countries?

Well, the fact that so many people in so many various cultures are opposing it might tell you something.

The fact that the agreement is secret might tell you something.

The fact that large corporations are privy to it might tell you something.

The fact that large corporations are for it might tell you something.

The fact that our own leaders don’t know shit about it before they vote – well, you probably figured that would be the case anyway – should tell you something.

But the most damning thing about the free trade agreement is what you now know about free trade – that as a panacea, it is worthless.

Things don’t just get better with free trade.

Free trade is just a song, a ditty, that the corpo-pigs sing to get you turn off your brain.

“Oh, look, honey, it’s free trade.  Let’s go get some free trade and all our problems will be solved.”

Tariffs, duties and laws exist to protect a nation’s autonomy and character, financially and spiritually.

When the British imperialists insisted on free trade of opium with China, what were the results?

To the free traders, an alleviation of pain for many Chinese who were clearly requesting the product through their consumption.

I love spin.

Perhaps the memory of that experiment with free trade gives China pause in joining this magic trade bill.